Lenovo 13 2nd gen touch screen

I've been looking into buying the newest (2nd) gen Lenovo 13. Other than updated processor, graphics and storage specs, it is also possible to configure this laptop with a backlit keyboard and a multitouch screen. I want to focus on the latter of these options in this thread.

I have read that it is generally a bad idea to buy a multitouch screen for an ordinary (non-convertible) when options are also available without, for the following five reasons. A touchscreen generally...

is more expensive

is less energy efficient

has poorer viewing angles

is thicker and heavier

is awkward and injurious

However, in this particular case:
(1) is not a critical problem, as it is only 25 euros more expensive, something I can afford.
(3) does not seem to be the case because both screens seem to be of the same matte type (rather than the more common glossy type for touch screens)
(5) is very much related to personal use. I don't consider this a problem. Obviously one should not over-use a touch screen on a laptop, but it can come in handy every now and then for underlining, highlighting, encircling, drawing arrows, etc. on images, slide shows and documents. I've already personally experienced this to be handy on my old X230T (without using it in tablet mode that is). Generally speaking, touch screens are more "future proof".

The points that possibly matter for me are (2) and (4), but I can't find actual data that supports this for the Lenovo 13 (2nd gen) model. I was hoping that anyone here can share their opinion, insight or knowledge about the matter.

As for (2), I'm particularly interested in numbers that represent the actual energy loss of having a touch screen, and if (for example) the additional energy losses can be avoided by switching the touch option off.

As for (4), I'm interested in whether the screens that are used for this particular model indeed differ in size and weight. Note that they have the same resolution, nits and both are matte, which makes me think that they must be quite identical in size too, but of course, this is not necessarily the case.

I'm also happy to hear other insights and points that I might have forgotten.

@soeptomaat even on Thinkpads with their brilliant trackpoint, I sometimes use touchscreen in laptop mode because it's more convenient. Touchscreen is a thing you better have than not. 4 is definitely irrelevant on modern devices; 2 - I pretty much doubt it has any noticeable effect.

I've been looking into buying the newest (2nd) gen Lenovo 13. Other than updated processor, graphics and storage specs, it is also possible to configure this laptop with a backlit keyboard and a multitouch screen. I want to focus on the latter of these options in this thread.

I have read that it is generally a bad idea to buy a multitouch screen for an ordinary (non-convertible) when options are also available without, for the following five reasons. A touchscreen generally...

is more expensive

is less energy efficient

has poorer viewing angles

is thicker and heavier

is awkward and injurious

However, in this particular case:
(1) is not a critical problem, as it is only 25 euros more expensive, something I can afford.
(3) does not seem to be the case because both screens seem to be of the same matte type (rather than the more common glossy type for touch screens)
(5) is very much related to personal use. I don't consider this a problem. Obviously one should not over-use a touch screen on a laptop, but it can come in handy every now and then for underlining, highlighting, encircling, drawing arrows, etc. on images, slide shows and documents. I've already personally experienced this to be handy on my old X230T (without using it in tablet mode that is). Generally speaking, touch screens are more "future proof".

The points that possibly matter for me are (2) and (4), but I can't find actual data that supports this for the Lenovo 13 (2nd gen) model. I was hoping that anyone here can share their opinion, insight or knowledge about the matter.

As for (2), I'm particularly interested in numbers that represent the actual energy loss of having a touch screen, and if (for example) the additional energy losses can be avoided by switching the touch option off.

As for (4), I'm interested in whether the screens that are used for this particular model indeed differ in size and weight. Note that they have the same resolution, nits and both are matte, which makes me think that they must be quite identical in size too, but of course, this is not necessarily the case.

I'm also happy to hear other insights and points that I might have forgotten.

Click to expand...

Unless you can fold the screen flat and use it as a tablet I find touch screen on conventional laptop is useless and is very awkward to use.